3 ms·

Saying people that say they were only there because of AA are obviously only there because of AA is a pretty reasonable point. Linking to the video (with som

by nailer 1y ago

Saying people that *say they were only there because of AA* are obviously only there because of AA is a pretty reasonable point. Linking to the video (with someone’s angry wrapper) directly: https://x.com/alluring_nyc/status/1965931096539017536?s=46 https://x.com/alluring_nyc/status/1965931096539017536?s=46 I wasn’t aware they said they were there because of AA, this is worthwhile information.

Forgeties79 1y ago
That is clearly not the assertion/part I am talking about, though I certainly have an opinion on that too. He literally said the above quote I mentioned. It was sexist/racist. It was wrong. You can weigh in on it or not that’s your choice. But this man was not the saint the right is making him out to be. It’s flagrant revisionist history Edit: I also forgot to respond to your Hortman comment. That does not matter. She and her husband were brutally murdered in their home for the crime of being democrats and holding office. How is that not worthy of national attention? How is that not the kind of political violence that the right allegedly cares about right now, despite the fact that right wingers are disproportionately the perpetrators of political violence over the last decade? If they had been Republicans we would still be hearing about it and you know it. https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2025/09/12/is-radical-left-violence-really-on-the-rise-in-america https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2025/09/12/is-radic... And since this is a paywalled source, here’s the graph that illustrates the issue: https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250920_WOC430.png https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250920_WOC...
- nailer 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Forgeties79 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - nailer 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]

3 ms·

Saying people that say they were only there because of AA are obviously only there because of AA is a pretty reasonable point. Linking to the video (with som

by nailer 1y ago

Forgeties79 1y ago
That is clearly not the assertion/part I am talking about, though I certainly have an opinion on that too. He literally said the above quote I mentioned. It was sexist/racist. It was wrong. You can weigh in on it or not that’s your choice. But this man was not the saint the right is making him out to be. It’s flagrant revisionist history Edit: I also forgot to respond to your Hortman comment. That does not matter. She and her husband were brutally murdered in their home for the crime of being democrats and holding office. How is that not worthy of national attention? How is that not the kind of political violence that the right allegedly cares about right now, despite the fact that right wingers are disproportionately the perpetrators of political violence over the last decade? If they had been Republicans we would still be hearing about it and you know it. https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2025/09/12/is-radical-left-violence-really-on-the-rise-in-america https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2025/09/12/is-radic... And since this is a paywalled source, here’s the graph that illustrates the issue: https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250920_WOC430.png https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250920_WOC...
- nailer 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Forgeties79 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - nailer 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]